Investigations at Columbia University Clash with Concerns about Free Speech on Campus

Nearly a year after college encampments were staged across campuses in the U.S., Columbia University—whose student protests garnered national attention—has begun investigating students who have been critical of Israel.

The university, under a new committee known as the Office of Institutional Equity, has sent notices to students—punishing them for writing op-eds, co-hosting art exhibits related to encampments, or sharing social media posts that reveal students’ political views, according to the Associated Press. 

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

Student activists there appear to be undeterred by the investigations. On Thursday, pro-Palestian protests took place at Columbia, and the closely affiliated Barnard College, after nine people were arrested the day prior when local police broke up an encampment.

Read More: Columbia University Investigates Students Critical of Israel

While the investigations are technically within their purview—the First Amendment only protects speech from federal, state, and local governments—some experts are critical of their actions.

“Private institutions, including private campuses, are not bound by the First Amendment,” says Nadine Strossen, a professor at New York Law School. “But Columbia has to honor First Amendment principles here.” 

Under the First Amendment, speech is protected so long as it is not bullying or harassment that targets a specific individual or particular group of individuals. Strossen contends that holding up a poster or sharing a social media post does not fall under the category of unprotected speech.  

Columbia University did not immediately respond to TIME’s request for comment. 

The investigations come as the federal government takes action against student protesters, particularly those that are critical of Israel. 

Last year, numerous university presidents were called to testify before Congress regarding the state of antisemitism on campus following a wave of pro-Palestinian protests. President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order in January due to “anti-Semitic harassment in schools and on university and college campuses.” The directive was criticized by Palestine Legal, which said the order would “sow a climate of fear and suspicion on campus, and to chill speech critical of Israel or supportive of Palestinian rights,” and called it a “McCarthyite crackdown” of pro-Palestinian students. More recently, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on Wednesday about how to combat antisemitism in the U.S.

Read More: No, Trump Did Not ‘Bring Back Free Speech’

An August 2024 report by Columbia’s task force on antisemitism found that Jews and Israelis at Columbia were often ostracized and humiliated on campus. For the purposes of the report, antisemitism included calls for divestment from Israel, and exclusion based on “real or perceived ties to Israel,” according to the Associated Press.  

“There seems to be a plausible claim that Columbia is cracking down on students’ free speech under pressure from the federal government,” says Strossen. “And when an ostensibly private sector action is resulting from pressure by the government, it is as if the government itself had directly acted.”

Still, some say that the actions of the university contradict its own guidelines. Columbia’s Rules of University Conduct states that students, staff, and others have the right to protest on campus and exercise free speech. Strossen also points out that more than 100 higher education universities—including Columbia—have officially endorsed the “Chicago Statement,” a free speech policy statement.

“The freedom to debate and discuss the merits of competing ideas does not, of course, mean that individuals may say whatever they wish, wherever they wish. The University may restrict expression that violates the law, that falsely defames a specific individual, that constitutes a genuine threat or harassment,” the “Chicago Statement” reads. “But these are narrow exceptions to the general principle of freedom of expression, and it is vitally important that these exceptions never be used in a manner that is inconsistent with the University’s commitment to a completely free and open discussion of ideas.”

Strossen adds that even if students are not penalized for their actions, the fact that they are being investigated causes intimidation. “Even if you end up not being punished for the mere fact that you’re being investigated and forced to defend yourself, it can itself be chilling,” she says. “Not only will that have some punitive impact on the people who have spoken, but it can well have a deterrent or chilling impact on other people, deterring them from engaging in similar expression.”

Source link